What is 'objective reality'?

I am using "Transcendent I Am" interchangeably with Buddha-Nature, Dzogchen, Christ Consciousness, Mahamudra, Godhead, Absolute Ground of Being etc, etc... along with Tao and more accurately to the Reality that they are all referring to (all descriptions will atleast have some inevitable culturally interpretive differences).

I am saying the word "I" when used in everyday language implies a singular entity, which is fine. When the word "I" is used to describe the Transcendent Awareness of "I Am"... that subtly added on singular quality with all it's subtle limitations may hijack onto one's mental image or understanding of the idea trying to be expressed (the referent of the words itself is nonconceptual). Such refinement of terms may seem unnecessary or a waste of time and energy, but adjusting these fine points can sometimes enable a more skillful understanding.

I don't think I differentiated between the Transcendent "I" and the limited "I" as I had hoped.

The universe and all events, including the perceived reality of the egoic self (conventional finite I, with your body, mind, personality etc..) are occurring within the Transcendent I or the Absolute Ground of Being that is ever-present, infinite and eternal...which is your authentic identity. We all share that same Identity and each person who experiences Nondual Realization (through whatever means) experiences that same Transcendent Reality. And your previous identity (the insatiable egoic limited "I") is seen to just have been a transitory illusion, that you got caught up in and believed you were.

 

Well,, better than that Giftedone.. let us start with the mere presumption that there is an alien... If you can operate on that presumption, then it is only fair that all other presumptions that could conceivably apply to this presumed alien need to apply. Fantasies regarding the subject of 'objective reality' just simply don't pan out... and the subject of 'aliens' is a fantasy with regard to what this society KNOWS about 'aliens'.

 

You were the one that asked about aliens and as usual you missed the point.

 

Wrong again Giftedone. You brought up the subject of aliens at http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=362936&p=1064028904#post1064028904 , then at your next post (post #100) you are the one who asked questions... NOT ME.

 

Now you are running from your own words again. You made a comment relating to aliens and I responded to your comment.

 

Short answer to the question of what is 'objective reality':

It is that with which religion tends to be at war, because its adherents see it but do not like it, and so seek to reject and deny it, substituting instead a more comforting, more emotionally satisfying reality.

 

Now you are projecting.
You previously stated "You were the one that asked about aliens and as usual you missed the point." Meaning 'question(s)'. Now you are saying that I merely made a comment. Make up your mind. You responded to my "comment" with questions that related to the presumed alien.

Seemingly it is you who is 'running from your own words'.

 

You made a comment about aliens.

I responded

You avoid clarifying your statement on aliens in relation to the topic at hand.

Having nothing to respond to as you did not clarify what you meant, I responded

Then you further derail the conversation by pretending you never made a claim in relation to aliens.

Look. If you do not want to defend your own points, then do not make them.

 

you derailed the thread by interjecting your fantasy about an alien in a conversation about 'objective reality'. Has an alien been found in that 'objective reality'? No? Then there is your derailment.

 

Until you can provide EVIDENCE that there is a realm beyond the physical realm, then yes, the physical realm is objective reality.

 

Tell that to the scientists and philosophers who are currently reviewing the subject of 'objective reality'. Here is an equal challenge to you: Show PROOF that something exists independent of human thought.

 

Easy, drop a hammer on your foot....Does it hurt? If the hammer didn't exist, then your foot wouldn't hurt...DUH!

 

that would not be independent of 'human thought'.

 

Moving goal posts now eh?

 

How so? The challenge was "Show PROOF that something exists independent of human thought. "

 

Drop a hammer(something external from you) on you foot. If your foot hurts, then the hammer exists outside of human thought.

By saying "that would not be independent of 'human thought'" is simply moving goal posts.

 

Identifying something as a hammer (external to human thought) requires human thought to make such identification. Aside from that, planning the necessary movements of the body to approach the thing suspected of being a 'hammer' also requires human thought... as would all other necessary steps in performing the requested action. One cannot pick up a hammer without identifying the hammer and then moving to pick up the hammer... all under the direction of human thought. Therefore, your request does NOT show something to exist independent of human thought.

 

Wrong. The hammer was only 'created' out of elements already present on Earth long before you and I were here. The elements that make up the hammer are outside of human thought.

So yes, the hammer is outside of human thought. Now, go drop it on your foot if you think its outside of human thought.

 

I did not derail the thread. You just lack understanding of the topic.

 

Aside from the secondary attempt to escape your dilemma of showing proof that something exists independent of human thought, you still have not given consideration of the human thought necessary to pick up anything whether it be a hammer or an apple. Now you make the argument that the hammer already exists... show proof that the hammer came into existence independent of human thought. And you are changing the goal posts by bringing up the condition of 'already exists'. The recognized existence is a condition of human thought. Again, labeling it as 'already exists' shows that you had previous human thought in re-cognition.

 

The mere fact that you cannot comprehend that the elements need to 'make the hammer' 'already existed' and is "out side of human thought" is NOT my problem.

Here is better one. Oxygen must exist outside of human thought. If it did not, you would be dead as the body needs oxygen to survive, and breathing is not a thought process. If you think it is, try holding your breath for 30 minutes. I'm sure we would all support this experiment.

 

Now you assume the role of 'mind reader'. You failed in that effort also.

 

Objective reality can be defined as the way things are independent of observation...it's unknowable.

Light, the massless particles that surrounds us can be both a wave or a particle depending upon how it is measured. Light in it's objective form is in a state of probabilities as to momentum and space.

Simply stated.
Objective reality does not exist to the extent it can be known.

 

Show proof that the 'elements' were in existence independent of human thought. This cat and mouse game can go on forever. The point being, there is nothing that you can name that can be shown to exist independent of human thought.

 

Easy, drop a hammer on your foot. Better yet, hold your breath for 30 minutes. See if you don't need that oxygen.

Yes this cat and mouse game can go on forever, because you simply will not admit when you are wrong. Its that simple.

Here is a list of some of the 118 known elements - all that must exist outside of independent human thought for you and I to even be here.